The Suitcase Held a Dark Secret - The Cruel Death of Minnie Freeman-Lee *RE-UPLOAD* 

Sadly…& Thank You!, bc I missed it but this was waiting for me when I woke. Yaaay!

RU-vid. 😒

I’m sure RU-vid keep moving the goalposts. There’s nothing in any of your videos that should be age restricted, unless you say at the beginning viewer discretion is advised

They are age restricting and demonetizing everyone it seems.

Enjoyed watching again. Thank you for the reup

But if she was a nasty person, she only had herself to blame for being friendless. However, being nasty is not an excuse for murder. Makes one wonder what happened prior to it. If that house could talk.

@kirkkaanoranssi2359 I wouldn’t be surprised if Minnie lived with a psychological condition that was compounded by her depression/ grief.

There can be no doubt that the prosecution did NOT prove this man guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. A miscarriage of justice

I thought maybe he did ask her for work, but she refused so instead he wanted to rob her because I thought the name thing was weird as well.

There is NO such thing as god!!!!!!! It is a fictitious being that was dreamt up thousands of years ago by way of an explanation for why we are all here. Julie Gill, Glasgow, Scotland

🤣🤣🤣🤣 fingers crossed you dont end up as one of the subjects on this channel

That's pretty disconcerting isn't it! Haha!! Pretty funny though, you may want to invest in some security measures??? A big dog,shotgun ..tazer?!???lol!

So it's not different from how they do stuff today

🤣

You okay?

Get off of my lawn!

People think you're joking but deadass some of these kids run around sounding like they're being murdered.

Merry Christmas, Patricia! I hope you and yours have a great day 🎄

Cute how you think they're fair now.

Yes I have seen cases where the accused was acquitted even though the evidence against them strongly suggested they had done it.

@@jameshogan6142 Iti s called 'Element of Doubt' If a juror has one suspicion that the accused id not guilty, they are required to say so. After all, do you want to be responsible for an Innocent person going to jail, or the gallows in this case, because it was 'suggested they did it?' Or if you are the one on trial, would you be happy that jurors had convicted you because you 'looked like' you may have done it? There is No Evidence in this case that should have resulted in George being hanged. Simple fact. He may well have done it, but it was not proved Without Doubt, therefore he should have been acquitted. Sorry That is how the Justice system works. You may be grateful of it one day.

Merry Christmas! I hope you have a great day 🎄

It could be he learned she was broke during interrogation and made that quote with the new information. 1 fingerprint? Nothing here sounds right.

​@@soldierski1669 Doesn't sound like the cops had fed him with the info or they wouldn't have used it as proof he did it.

​@@soldierski1669 Just because they just found one doesn't mean there wasn't more. Remember that fingerprints was a very new thing.

In what way? It could have just as easily been said by a man who was concerned about the old lady he was working for. Maybe she told him she had no money. it is total hearsay, and should have been inadmissable evidence, as it proves Nothing at all. If anything it leans towards his Innocence.

@@xElvirax Have you considered that she told him herself?

Thank you for watching, Cindy. I hope you have a great day tomorrow and a happy new year 🎄

She probably had a widows or old age pension. That may have been her only source of income though.

It certainly doesnt seem like a safe verdict. Not enough to convict.

It was a tentative match to begin with. At that point, the technology was cutting edge and new for criminology. That said, it seems like he did it --- based on the narrative the police provided, but who is to say with that kind of doubt? It could be argued that the late addition of the scarf was due to a fumble at the desk typing the report up, or an almost forgotten addition that had to be edited in. Likewise, with the time of death, again, the doctor may have been mistaken, or taken into account that the perpetrator wouldn't have just stuck around if a woman was slowly suffocating --- he could have established an alibi, especially with the notion that she wouldn't be checked up on, anytime soon. The milk delivery may have damned him. The lady sounded like a nervous mess --- unable to cope with the world outside her door, except for a single delivery. I wonder how he was able to get into her home, without being noticed or making an obvious mess with wood/glass shards. The blue scarf was never explained by him, either, or at least, his defense wasn't recorded. For all we know, everything was fabricated --- except for the guy's established criminal record. In a home with so much stuff, and presumably a lot of time, why was this the only thing taken? Or was everything worth something hocked before this ... or did this lady just not have much of anything (cash, jewelry, etc). To me, if he still had some jewelry, or was reported to have spent a lot at the pub recently, that would have clinched it. As it stands, too many questions to be sure if it was him.

It'sactually quite simple.If he was working there, and the house was as dirty and dusty as they said, it is quite possible that he had entered the house at some point and it had been there for ages. The key issue is Where it was found, and that was never addressed.

People kill people in the UK and think they won't get picked up by some camera somewhere. Criminals are not always masterminds. A lot of them are very very stupid

He hurt a lot of people. He had a very long wrap sheet, including violence. You don't need to feel too badly for him. You are big hearted though. Happy holidays!

Maria I don't think you were paying attention to the story😂

It's a shame really.

It is a hard call TOD, so it may have been a big guess to start with and not a difficult change once there was a time line, but they may not have mentioned that to the jury.

I can see it too.

😮omg !!??… yes I can see it too!!!.. I got chills 😮!!

The milkman delivered in the morning. (I suppose he doesn't go back during the day to see if the customers took it in.) So if not then the milk would still be out from the morning before.

I doubt she had any, the house was dilapidated and no repairs being done etc, she was probably living on a fixed income.

Pretty sure the one performing the autopsy knows what to look for more than you do. They have to study a shitton and know things about the human body we don't know.

He almost certainly didn't plan to kill her, but he caused her death in the course of a robbery. That was murder in the law of the day.

@@xElviraxShe was found with, “dark bruises, gashes and wounds”, I don’t understand how people can think someone locking an old woman up in a suitcase after severely beating her with the expectation, and hope, of no one finding her doesn’t show a clear intent for that person to die. Lol WOW. Naive

Yea she just stuffed herself into that trunk and tied up her own hands and feet😂

@@xElvirax But that doesn't mean that George did! Could have been the milkman! Dear gods, may you Never be on a jury!

Yes particularly when he faced the death penalty if convicted. The circumstances point to him being guilty but the evidence was extremely flimsy.

They thought so or else they wouldn't have hung him.

​@@xElvirax Oh its 'Hang emm High again' lets see how You would feel if you had been the accused in this case. There is Not one Shred of Certifiable evidence against this man. A fingerprint that may or may not have been his, a scarf that may or not have been the deceased's . A TOD that gets changed on the prosecutions whim. A throwaway remark that he made that could have just as easily Proved his innocence if taken another way. I hope you are never on a jury, but I Do hope you face one as blinkered as you!

Fingerprinting was very new. I don't think he knew it would bust him.

That or he was framed by someone working for the cops. But I do lean towards he did it.

Totally circumstantial. If he was working at the house and it was not cleaned that fingerprint could have been there for ages. Secondly he Did have an alibi, until the coroner changed the time of death. As for his comments about her wealth or lack of it, she was a lonely old lady with no one in the world. What is to say she did not talk to him, as he went about his work? Even the scarf is circumstantial. He had a blue silk scarf. The victim May have owned a blue silk scarf at some point in her past. No evidence that they were one and the same, other than an unreliable witness who said they looked similar. This should have been laughed out of court, instead a man died for it. He May have killed Minnie, but on this evidence there was no way he should have been convicted.

@@hogwashmcturnip8930 Mostly circumstantial but circumstantial evidence IS evidence and the evidence of the fingerprint is compelling. It was found in the depths of the house, which Russell said he had never been in - he had wiped his prints off everything else but missed this. Of course the scarf is not very strong evidence but he was not and would not have been convicted on the strength of it. The rest of the evidence was more than enough to convict him.

@@andrewwarmington Not really. A good defence could have made mincemeat of it

My mother told me I got my red hair from the milk man.....took me years until I realized it was a joke.

I nearly forgot that saying. Thank you for this fond memory

@@susanfaulkner2304 The way I used to hear it was that a fortune teller told someone his dad would die on such a date. His father lived long after the predicted day but sure to form the milkman croaked it to the very hour.

You said it yourself Circumstantial. There is Not One Shred of Evidence that should have led to a man being hanged. This is not a Lynch mob, this should be a properly carried out trial. And it was nowhere near.

Nor does it prove he wasn't innocent. There is a thing called 'Element of Doubt' If you are on a jury, if you have a single element of doubt about the evidence you have been presented with, or the accused's guilt, you Must find Not Guilty. This case is so full of holes the Owl and the Pussycat could set sail in it. Just thinking 'he probably did it' is not good enough. In those days that was a man's life in your hands, and if you wrongly convict that makes you as much guilty of murder as the perpetrator of the original crime.

What exactly did he say? In what way? were you there?